THE HOUSE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 888, 6 August 1910, Page 3

THE HOUSE.

FINANCIAL DEBATE. MR. CRAICIE'S VIEWS. When the House met : yesterday the debato on the Budget was resumed. Mr. CKAIGIE (Timaru) said that millions were handled by the Treasurer every year. It was wonderful how the Treasurer could handle these ' large sums and do it in a businesslike way; — well and good. He did not think that the criticism of Mr. W. Eraser, the financial genius of the Opposition, on the Budget finance was correct. In regard to the sinking fund, he'believed the Treasurer's idea was .to obtain loans with a long currency. If he did that■' then they would have a sound finance. He also approved of the manner in which it was proposed to invest the funds. He saw the boh. member for Wakatipu shaking his head, but he (Mr. Craigie) thought the proposal was a statesmanlike one.. He warned the Opposition not to "put its foot into it" as regards this proposal. As to stopping borrowing, he would vote with Mr. Massey if the latter could show him how they could get on without it.' He did not believo there was any "graft", in New Zealand.

OPINIONS OF MR. PARATA. Mr. PARATA (Southern Maori) said ho agreed that the Maoris should pay rates and taxes if they were given tho same rights, and privileges as the white people. As the result of old laws, tho Maoris were tied hand and foot, and were prevented from using , their best efforts. If the Maoris paid rates, those rates should bo expended on tho Maori lands—(Mr. Carroll: Hear, hear) —for their improvement.. In the South Island the bulk of the Maori' lands. were already paying rates, but if a Maori asked tho County Council for. money for a road thoy were told that no money was available. Therefore, what was the good of the Maori paying rates? The money the South Island Maoris had obtained had 1 been obtained directly from tho Government. It was not derived .'from the rates paid.' It was'paid from revenue, of. which the. Maori paid his share. Tho 'Maori Was as capable as the European, • but the Government must open, up the way for him in tho working of their lauds, the, raising of stock, etc. A portion of tho Maori lands, however, should bomado absolutely inalienable, because he did not liko ,to see the Maoris like some .Euroloans'going about tho country sleeping ■in pig-sties and hen-roosts until thoy got spine work to pay for it. MR. SIDEY'S SPEECH. Mr.' SIDEY (Dunedin South) prefaced his remarks with a defence of the retrenchment proposals.. It was utterly wrong to suggest that the savings under tiie scheme Would only amount to £95,000 per annum. ■ For many years the Departmental expenditure had bcW increasing at the rate.of £200,000 per annum, but such would not be the caso this. year. . Tliq principle of. establishing sinking funds to extinguish tho public debt was a good one. Overborrowing should not be allowed to take place, as. it occasioned industrial disturbances. Workers , should have the right to borrow on a'house which thoy desired to purchase, as well as on a house in' the course of erection. He would liko tho Prime Minister to give more information as to how it was proposed to invest the sinking 'funds of local bodies. Mr. Sidey denied that tho Death Duties Act was likely to drive capital out of the country. The New Zealand law on this subject was similar to that in the. Old Country, and ho predicted that Australia would soon follow the example of New Zealand, so that wealthy people, in ■ this country would have 110 inducement to go thore to avoid the duties.

? MR. MALCOLM CONDEMNS THE _ LEASEHOLD. g Mr. ' MALCOLM (Clutha) declared r tJiat the loss to the Dominion through j loss of .taxation' under tile leasehold t system was £50,000 . yearly. Then . again, there was a loss of a i per cent. 0 because the.sections wore leased at 4V a per cent, whereas if they were sold the . Crown would get i> per cent. In addit .tion the cost of management and in- - spection.of the Crown leaseholds had l 1 also to be reckoned. Another matter 1 vvhich had to hi? taken into considers-, i' tion was the fact that leaseholds wore , not so well fanned as freeholds. !f r the State adopted the leasehold. system pure and simple, it might find 3 some day that it had ahuge sum . locked up in doubtful securities as land I values might rccedc. If by granting - the freehold they could provide a prosperous, happy, and contented class of ) people on the land it would bo an r object well wortlV gaining.. 1 HON. J. A. MILLAR'S SPEECH. The Hon. A. MTLLAII (Minister > for Labour) said that .the land question ■ was not tho only matter dealt with in tho Budget. It had to be remembered that, when tlio . Government went to I tho country at the last election it did so after passing a .Land .Bill, und yet , it camo back with a majority of 24. Mr. Massey: Twenty-four freeholders. Mr. Millar urged that if the freehold had been such a wonderful thing, how was it that a leasehold Govorii- . Mont had come hack with that majority? Mr. Massey: Pledged to opposo their policy. Mr. Miliar said that in.one case altor a certain candidate had addressed an (•lection mooting, speaking .strong- | ly for the freehold, lie was jjtsk'd b£ the electors ,wiii; he

did not support the leasehold like the other candidate. Yet in the samo placo that '.man, got- a big.- majority, showing that the question of'freehold or leasehold liad very. littio effect, on tlio election. What were the advantages of the sottler with the freehold? He had tlie advantage of the mortgage, and that was, tlio only thing, the • mortgages that existed now amounted to close on eighty millions. That was what the settlers had with tho freehold.

Mr. Malcolm: i He has ' the chance to pay it off. •' • Mr. Millar: Yes; but year by year you havo the mortgages increasing. - : Mr. Malcolm: Settlement is iuoreasing too. Continuing, Mr. Millar stated that if it wero not for the leasehold system there would not have been half-, the pcoplo settled on tho land who were there to-day, and the Opposition wanted now to deny to future generations tho same opportunity as the men had had who were on the land to-day. ("Not No!") Mr. Millar repeated that this would bo tho effect of tho freehold sys.tem. It was entirely a mistake to think that the city men were against the small farmers. He challenged Mr. Malcolm to show that many of the city men had voted against the legislation passed for the benefit of the . bona fide small farmer during tho last fifteen years. No one had done more to support tho small farmer than the ■ city members; but they did not make a cry about it. The small farmer had his rights, but ho was not the only man to be considered. But when those who spoke about the disabilities of the small farmer ware asked to give some support to tho'city workers, whero were they?

Industries and Free Trade. Mr. Millar said he would like to see tho man who could 6how him how to build up industries iu a young country with Free-trade Mr. Malcolm: New South Wales. • Mr. Millar said : that since New South Wales got the tariff it was increasing it.- A farmer could get the whole of ,the product of his labour whether it was put on a leasehold or a freehold. In regard to the question of tenure there were two different ..standpoints: the people, in the South 'Island were dealing 'with land upon which they could make a living straight away; the people in the North Island were dealing mostly with bush lands. These • wero two different questions, and they.should be treated separately.Ono of the, reasons why the Opposition wanted the freehold to be 1 adopted was that there would be so much more money to spend throughout tho country. - Sinking Funds Scheme. As regards the sinking funds proposal, it would appear that critics ma-do out that in making provision'to pay off tho debt tbe ■ Government-' would bo really adding to it under their : schemc. In four' years the floating debt in tho way of Treasury bills had been reduced from £750,000 to £100,000. It was a funny line of argument to say that when 'the Government paid' off £100 ut its.debt it was adding to it bv £100. The Opposition complained of the Government borrowing, and also complained about moneys not being spent. If all the claims of tho Opposition were ac'Jeded to the Dominion could riot ■ long remain solvent-.. . .. Mr. Massey: Do you think that wo should refrain from asking for votes for our districts? Mr. Millar:'No. ' ' Continuing his remarks, Mr. ■'Milla-i said tho Opposition continually harped about : the increase of the Public Debt without pointing out "that the assets against them were also -increasing. There had been some talk by the Opposition of a decline in the industries. Still the Opposition would not hear of a duty- -on—agricultural and mining machinery. Mr. Malcolm: What has your duty dono for the boot trade? - Mr.-Millar:'lt has kept many, men off tho streets. - Mr. Malcolm: The trade has declined. ■ Mr.. Millar: The Free-trader believes in buying in the cheapest' markets; 1 Resuming, Mr. Millar said that if it were desired that the .-industries should improve, a little more protection was necessary. In- regard to Mr. Herdman's statement .that labour legislation was driving capital out of the ■wintry, and his-'quotation of a specific ease of £10,000 having been" taken 'iway, Mr. Millar said, lie was' now : negotiating with a. man who was. putting £50,000 into an industry, in the South Island, and. that within a few: weeks. The statistics; were dead against Mr. Herdnian's statement.' gome interesting remarks ■ by Mr. Millar on railway management are reported in another column. Mr. HERRIES I (Tauranga) ■ followed with' an important speech on. the Natiyo land-question,, and was replied to by the Hon. James Carroll. Both their speeches aro reported.; .in. ' another column. '. Mr. JENNINGS (Taumarunui) moved the adjournment of -the debate, and the House rose at 11.45 p.m.